Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

London Borough of Barnet

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 22-012-138 Sector Transport And Highways Category Highway Repair And Maintenance Decided 21 December 2022

View Barnet scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway repairs costs. This is because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint.

The complaint

Mr Y complains that the Council has charged him for repairing the pavement outside his property, costing him over £300.

Mr Y has paid the amount but feels this is excessive for the work done.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

How I considered this complaint

I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

The Council issued a bill to Mr Y for over £300 for the repairs to the pavement outside his property in July 2022. Mr Y challenged the bill with the Council, saying that the damage had not been caused by works on his property, but said they were consistent with wear and tear on the pavement along the road.

Between September and November, Mr Y wrote to the Council saying he did not feel responsible for the damage, which the Council responded to by asking again for payment. Mr Y paid the amount, before coming to us in December 2022 at the suggestion of the Council.

Analysis Under the Highways Act 1980, the Highways Authority, in this case the Council, may “recover the expenses reasonably incurred by them in so doing from the owner of the land in question or the person causing or responsible for the damage”.

The Council says the damage was caused during work on Mr Y’s property and it therefore considers him responsible for these costs. Mr Y disagrees with this. If Mr Y disputed the Council’s view, he could have put in a defence to any recovery action the Council may have taken for these costs through the courts at the time. Mr Y may now find it difficult to challenge this as the bill has been paid. However, it is for the courts to decide what impact this would have on liability for a disputed bill.

The courts can decide liability, where the Ombudsman cannot decide such matters. It is therefore better placed to determine this complaint so we will not investigate.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because the courts are better placed to consider this complaint.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving London Borough of Barnet

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-018-611 Other
25-008-117 Not Upheld
25-001-939 Other
25-022-201 Other
25-018-992 Other
View all decisions for this organisation